RE: Proposal for GHC documentation

2003-01-06 Thread Simon Marlow
> > The rewritten documentation can be translated
> > to HTML using just a standard xsltproc tool (available
> > for both Cygwin & Linux) and XSLT DocBook stylesheet.
> > The main advantage of XML version is that there is
> > already developed XSLT stylesheet which generates
> > input for Microsoft HTML Help Compiler.
> ...
> > I think that this will made GHC documentation much more easy
> > for reading and browsing.
> 
> I would strongly support such a change.

Me too, I'm happy for us to move to DocBook/XML if that would give us
more functionality and compatibility with existing tools, and it seems
that this is the case.  I imagine the updated docs will continue to work
with an existing DocBook system as long as the DocBook 4 DTD is
installed?

If that's the case, would you like to commit your changes Krasimir?

Cheers,
Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users



RE: Proposal for GHC documentation

2002-12-29 Thread Mike Thomas
Hi all.

> The rewritten documentation can be translated
> to HTML using just a standard xsltproc tool (available
> for both Cygwin & Linux) and XSLT DocBook stylesheet.
> The main advantage of XML version is that there is
> already developed XSLT stylesheet which generates
> input for Microsoft HTML Help Compiler.
...
> I think that this will made GHC documentation much more easy
> for reading and browsing.

I would strongly support such a change.

As an aside to you, Krasimir, I would like to say thanks for the great work
you did this year on the Object-IO library which I use a lot when
programming with GHC.

Cheers

Mike Thomas.


___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users